On 05/13/2011 06:45 PM, John Berry wrote:
"other forms of energy"
Hmmm, funny you don't just say oil.
Or perhaps there is something I don't know and I should take the term "Light
Brigade" more literally? Was the war over all that Silicon in the sand to
make Solar Cells?
Of course oil can't be replaced by Nuclear, since we aren't about to drive
nuclear powered cars.
But we can switch to electric cars, but why of all the options is nuclear
better than "other forms of energy" just as solar, wind, hydro, wave, tide,
biofuel and true alternatives such as what this list is dedicated to?
And what about the other issues around Nuclear power, the waste that is a
huge problem that will be around forever on a human time scale and as long
as Nuclear power is used the problem will grow.
Then what about the fact that if Nuclear is the only supported option then
many countries will take it up and that leads directly into
Nuclear Weapon programs. (*Each year a typical 1000 mega-watt (MW)
commercial power reactor will produce 300 to 500 pounds of plutonium --
enough to build between 25 - 40 Nagasaki-sized atomic bombs.*)
And then if a natural or man made disaster occurs a meltdown can't be
stopped and spews radioactive waste everywhere.
Anyway the war in Iraq was not about oil, they were trying to help the Iraqi
people or it was somehow connected to 9/11, Just ask Bush, he might recall.
Oh, that's right, the reason for the war was the claim that Iraq had weapons
of mass destruction.
Clearly everyone having Nuclear power doesn't contribute to suspicions that
people have access to WMD.
Well, blaming nuclear power for Iraq's invasion. That's original, can't
deny it.
When I said "other forms of energy" I was referring to oil, yes. Nuclear
power has its problems, but it's probably the only serious alternative
to replace oil to generate electricity, in the short term. Electric cars
are a great idea, but they come with the little detail that they need
electricity to run. That electricity will have to be generated somehow.
Tapping it from the Van Allen belt? I have my doubts.
I think that alternative energy sources like solar, wind, wave, etc. are
currently not "energy dense" enough to replace oil. That will only
aggravate in the future, when the world energy demands increase. In
fact, it's aggravating right now. Why do you think so many developing
countries are building nuclear reactors? Because they want to produce
weapons grade material? No, it's because they see their energy demand
increasing, and that oil is becoming more and more costly and difficult
to obtain. India is building Thorium reactors, by example, which cannot
be used to produce weapons grade material.
I may sound conventional here, but it's just a question of thinking in
terms or real, already existing, options.
I think that things like cold fusion are unfortunately still in the
future. I would love to be proved wrong, and to see a power plant based
on Rossi's energy catalyzer working at the end of the year, but I have
serious doubts about it. Time will tell. Fortunately we don't need to
wait much.
Regards,
Mauro
